• Monika M Safford, Susan Andreae, Andrea L Cherrington, Michelle Y Martin, Jewell Halanych, Marquita Lewis, Ashruta Patel, Ethel Johnson, Debra Clark, Christopher Gamboa, and Joshua S Richman.
• Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama msafford@uab.edu.
• Ann Fam Med. 2015 Aug 1; 13 Suppl 1 (Suppl 1): S18S26S18-26.

PurposeIt is unclear whether peer coaching is effective in minority populations living with diabetes in hard-to-reach, under-resourced areas such as the rural South. We examined the effect of an innovative peer-coaching intervention plus brief education vs brief education alone on diabetes outcomes.MethodsThis was a community-engaged, cluster-randomized, controlled trial with primary care practices and their surrounding communities serving as clusters. The trial enrolled 424 participants, with 360 completing baseline and follow-up data collection (84.9% retention). The primary outcomes were change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (BP), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), body mass index (BMI), and quality of life, with diabetes distress and patient activation as secondary outcomes. Peer coaches were trained for 2 days in community settings; the training emphasized motivational interviewing skills, diabetes basics, and goal setting. All participants received a 1-hour diabetes education class and a personalized diabetes report card at baseline. Intervention arm participants were also paired with peer coaches; the protocol called for telephone interactions weekly for the first 8 weeks, then monthly for a total of 10 months.ResultsDue to real-world constraints, follow-up was protracted, and intervention effects varied over time. The analysis that included the 68% of participants followed up by 15 months showed only a significant increase in patient activation in the intervention group. The analysis that included all participants who eventually completed follow-up revealed that intervention arm participants had significant differences in changes in systolic BP (P = .047), BMI (P = .02), quality of life (P = .003), diabetes distress (P = .004), and patient activation (P = .03), but not in HbA1c (P = .14) or LDL-C (P = .97).ConclusionTelephone-delivered peer coaching holds promise to improve health for individuals with diabetes living in under-resourced areas.© 2015 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

35 keywords...

hide…